Disposed¶19

Susovon Chandra v. Moumita Chandra Maity

Calcutta HC9 Sept 2025CO/1934/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CO 1934 of 2025, decided 09.09.2025, Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.; Article 227 Constitution of India; husband-petitioner Susovon Chandra v. Moumita Chandra Maity; order no. 29 dated 24.04.2025, Additional District Judge 4th Court Paschim Medinipur; Matrimonial Suit No. 88 of 2022; prayer for evidence by video conferencing rejected; petitioner resident in USA willing to appear in person; directions to conduct and conclude cross-examination between September 19 and September 23, 2025; impugned order modified; application disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order no. 29 dated April 24, 2025 modified only to the extent that the learned trial judge is directed to take up the petitioner's cross-examination on September 19, 2025, endeavouring to conclude it that day, failing which on consecutive dates on or before September 23, 2025.

Susovon Chandra Vs Moumita Chandra Maity — Writ and Judicial Review | Calcutta HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned rejection of the petitioner's prayer for recording his evidence through video conferencing should be modified, given that the petitioner is ready and willing to travel from the USA to face cross-examination in person at Paschim Medinipur.

¶14

Ratio / Principle

Since the petitioner, though residing in the USA, is ready and willing to come down to Paschim Medinipur to face cross-examination, the learned trial judge is directed to take up the petitioner's cross-examination on the next date fixed, i.e., September 19, 2025, and to endeavour to conclude it on that date.

¶18

Key takeaways

If the petitioner's cross-examination cannot be concluded on September 19, 2025, the learned trial judge is requested to fix consecutive dates and endeavour to conclude the cross-examination on or before September 23, 2025.ratio¶18
The application stands disposed of with the impugned order modified only to the extent of the directions regarding the conduct and conclusion of the petitioner's cross-examination.ratio¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Article 227 application by husband (residing in USA) against order no. 29 dated April 24, 2025 of the learned Additional District Judge, 4th Court, Paschim Medinipur in Matrimonial Suit No. 88 of 2022, by which his prayer to record evidence through video conferencing was rejected. Since the petitioner was ready and willing to travel to Paschim Medinipur (arriving September 17, 2025; returning to USA October 1, 2025) and his cross-examination stood fixed for September 19, 2025, the Single Judge (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.) directed the trial judge to take up the cross-examination on September 19, 2025, conclude it that day if possible, failing which on consecutive dates on or before September 23, 2025. Application disposed of by modifying the impugned order only to this extent.

Court No. 6

CO 1934 of 2025

(265719)

09.09.2025

(AD 28)

Susovon Chandra

Vs.

Moumita Chandra Maity

(S. Banerjee)

Mr. Subrata Ghosh

…for the petitioner

Mr. Arup Krishna Das Mr. Rajarshi Ghosh

¶13

…for the opposite party

¶14

This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the husband and is directed against order no. 29 dated April 24, 2025 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 4^th Court at Paschim Medinipur in Matrimonial Suit No. 88 of 2022. By the order impugned the prayer of the petitioner for recording the evidence thorough video conferencing stood rejected.

¶15

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has made an arrangement to come down to Paschim Medinipur for the purpose of facing the cross-examination. He further submits that the date of cross-examination of the petitioner is fixed on September 19, 2025.

¶16

¶17

Heard Mr. Das, learned advocate appearing for the opposite party.

¶18

The petitioner is presently residing in USA. Since the petitioner is ready and willing to come down to Paschim Medinipur to face the cross-examination and he is schedule to arrive at Paschim Medinipur on September 17, 2025 and shall return to USA only on October 1, 2025, this court is of the considered view that the ends of justice would be sub-served if the learned trial judge is directed to take up the crossexamination of the petitioner on the next date fixed, i.e., on September 19, 2025 and to make an endeavour to conclude the same on that date. If for any reason the cross-examination of the petitioner cannot be concluded on that date, the learned trial judge is requested to fix consecutive dates for crossexamination and make an endeavour to conclude the cross-examination of the petitioner on or before September 23, 2025.

¶19

With the above observation and direction, CO 1934 of 2025 stands disposed of by modifying the impugned order only to the extent as indicated above.

¶20

(Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)

Susovon Chandra v. Moumita Chandra Maity

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Susovon Chandra v. Moumita Chandra Maity

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kalpana Das and Ors. Vs the Punjab National Bank and Ors.

Avijit Mallick Vs Ananya Nandi (Mallick)

Taraknath Dey Vs Swapan Dey and Ors.

Damodar Valley Corporation Vs Bharat Hi Tech Cement Pvt. Ltd.

Mahidul Ansari Vs Jibannecha Faiji Begum and Ors.

Pratima Banerjee and Ors. Vs Sujit Banerjee